Cover Story
In the trans-Atlantic, vessels move roughly 4,000 TEUs through four ports, translating to an additional cost of $ 1,000 per TEU,“ which more or less eliminates the freight rate,” Toft said.“ The trans-Atlantic will be uneconomical if we can’ t pass on the costs.”
Still, questions remain as to when the proposal would be implemented, as well as how the fees would be calculated and collected.
“ There’ s some interpretation of this thing that still needs to be done,” Peter Friedmann, executive director of the Agriculture Transportation Coalition( AgTC), said during TPM25.“ For example, if you’ re not a Chinese company, and you are not bringing a Chinese-built ship here, but you have some Chinese ships in your fleet operating somewhere else, are you also subject to the penalty for that non-Chinese-built ship coming in? These are things that aren’ t clear now, so they’ re not ready to implement.”
Missing the mark?
According to the Trump administration, the proposed fees— along with federal legislation known as the SHIPS Act and other measures soon to be announced— aim to revitalize the US shipbuilding industry and merchant marine fleet, both of which have been in decline for the better part of 80 years.
Having built a dominant maritime fleet in the lead up to World War II, the US divested more than 1,000 vessels to its allies via the Merchant Ships Sales Act of 1946 to accelerate post-war reconstruction by facilitating and lowering the cost
Got ports?
Hutchison deal reveals carriers’ thirst for terminal assets
By Peter Tirschwell
Container lines going back to Sea-Land Service Inc. have seen value in controlling marine terminals, but the advantages— and the competition to acquire key facilities— are intensifying in line with growing port congestion, finite port capacity and the growing dominance of a top tier of mega carriers.
Securing port access and the efficiencies it brings, while allowing competitors to be blocked out, was the major victory that Mediterranean Shipping Co.( MSC) achieved by participating via its terminal operating unit in the $ 23 billion deal with BlackRock to acquire the non-China assets of Hong Kong-based conglomerate CK Hutchison’ s terminal portfolio.
The acquisition itself could be in jeopardy due to opposition in Beijing, but the reasoning behind the attempt is no less revealing. For its part, the Chinese government is concerned that the sale of the Hutchison’ s terminals in Panama would allow the Panama Canal to be“ Americanized” and“ politicized,” with the US using the canal for“ political purposes and pursuit of its own political agenda,” according to commentary published March 13 in the China state-backed Hong Kong newspaper Ta Kung Pao.
For large carriers like MSC, the ability to align their growing share of the global market— forged through consolidation and organic growth— with capacity at the ports has become a significant competitive differentiator.
“ The aspiration of major carriers and alliances today is the ability to control their own destiny with regard to port and terminal operating capability,” said Peter Levesque, advanced leadership fellow at Harvard University who has led terminal operating businesses, including Modern Terminals and Ports America.
“ This deal with Blackrock speaks volumes as to what MSC looks to achieve.”
If the deal is completed, MSC, through its Terminal Investment Limited( TiL) unit, will gain access to terminals at 43 ports in 23 countries totaling 199 berths— although some of those terminals may be divested pursuant to antitrust review in Europe— making it the world’ s largest terminal operator.
“ The fact that TiL is involved in this deal with BlackRock speaks volumes as to what MSC looks to achieve in global terminal operating capability and competitive advantage,” Levesque said.
The competition among carriers for prized port assets is evident on multiple fronts. Hapag-Lloyd last year announced the creation of a terminal operating unit, reflecting its commitment to“ expansive terminal operations,” and on March 10 announced the acquisition of a majority stake in a Le Havre terminal operator. Maersk, CMA CGM and Ocean Network Express have also been growing their respective terminal portfolios.
“ There is a tendency for each shipping line now to build their own terminal portfolio,” said Robbert van Trooijen, head of consultancy Inception Partners LLC Inc. and the former Maersk head of Asia-Pacific and Latin America.
Carriers are growing increasingly aggressive in pursuit of ports. In its winning bid to acquire Global Container Terminal facilities at Bayonne and Staten Island, CMA CGM agreed to the surprise terms of sharing detention and demurrage revenue with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and to helping fund quayside improvements.
CK Hutchison said the TiL / BlackRock deal resulted from a“ competitive process in which numerous bids and expressions of interest were received,” which reportedly included other carriers.
Driven by capacity constraints
Carriers’ urgency in acquiring terminals reflects concerns about growing port
12 Journal of Commerce | April 7, 2025 www. joc. com